Differences in spectral profiles between rostral and caudal premotor cortex when hand-eye actions are decoupled
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this research was to understand how the brain controls voluntary movement when not directly interacting with the object of interest. In the present study, we examined the role of premotor cortex in this behavior. The goal of this study was to characterize the oscillatory activity within the caudal and rostral subdivisions of dorsal premotor cortex (PMdc and PMdr) with a change from the most basic reaching movement to one that involves a simple dissociation between the actions of the eyes and hand. We were specifically interested in how PMdr and PMdc respond when the eyes and hand are decoupled by moving along different spatial planes. We recorded single-unit activity and local field potentials within PMdr and PMdc from two rhesus macaques during performance of two types of visually guided reaches. During the standard condition, a visually guided reach was performed whereby the visual stimulus guiding the movement was the target of the reach itself. During the nonstandard condition, the visual stimulus provided information about the direction of the required movement but was not the target of the motor output. We observed distinct task-related and topographical differences between PMdr and PMdc. Our results support functional differences between PMdr and PMdc during visually guided reaching. PMdr activity appears more involved in integrating the rule-based aspects of a visually guided reach, whereas PMdc is more involved in the online updating of the decoupled reach. More broadly, our results highlight the necessity of accounting for the nonstandard nature of a motor task when interpreting movement control research data.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".